We had a spate of cast copies here in the UK which were made by joining two halves and they appeared in around 2005, though it took some time for people to be aware as you needed to see two identical but mutually exclusive coins. Some of the copies identified were Charles I A1/1, C2/1 and F3/1 shillings, Elizabeth I groat, James I 3rd coinage shilling, Edward I class 9b penny of Newcastle, 1713 halfcrown and others. The F3/1 came to light because I had a coin listed on my website and someone asked me if I had sold it (no I hadn't) as it was listed on ebay. (I had purchased the original on ebay in 2004, but no copies had been identified at that time). The earliest documented purchase I have noted is Dec. 2005. I wrote an article in the Spink Numismatic Circular 12 or 13 years ago showing how to identify that particular item. Thankfully, the messy strike made identification easy.
Again, some forumites just make me say wow. @Insider I called it fake. You called it fake. I chose to use a clever way to say it. Yet, you felt the need to imply that certain members here are childish and ignorant. Sometimes I wonder why this forum is declining, then I think of some of the things that happen here, and I don’t wonder anymore. edited to add - This is not a rant, I just don’t see the need to throw shade on people who don’t reply with a detailed analysis of their opinion. If you’d like me to not respond to your posts, all you have to do is PM me your request and I will honor it.
#1 I was raised by wolves. I hate dealing with 99.9% of people, especially the clowns of the world. 2. In my experience, when someone is stumped for an answer, they duck out with humor. #3 When I take the time to post something that just might help those who are not as "expert" as you and others, I hope for serious replies. Perhaps I should not have included you with the others because at least you stated an opinion - fake. Therefore, I deserve to be called out by you. 4. There is something very obviously "wrong" about this coin. When I ask: "WHAT DO YOU SEE," I am in hopes that members will answer in detail. It helps everyone. Saying "FAKE" helps very little. In this case, file marks, crevices, seam, all apply and will help novices who are too afraid to answer a simple question. 5. @mrbreeze posted: "I just don’t see the need to throw shade on people who don’t reply with a detailed analysis of their opinion." Correction: I gave no opinion in the OP. I asked a question. It was not answered by the "cats." F's all around this time. And F's to anyone who does not understand the reason I ALWAYS ask for a detailed analysis of what they see. I am trying to train the eyes and minds of members, so they become better collectors. HERE IS A CLUE: Today we got in an 1860-S 25c in VF that had the surface of a dug coin. The person who dropped it off had a great story. Several dealers wanted to buy it and sent the guy to us. The coin looked perfectly genuine - VF details. The coin looked good with a hand lens. When I asked some very experienced professionals to look at the coin and describe (in words) what they saw THEIR OPINIONS CHANGED! The coin is a counterfeit! So hopefully, some of you guys will humor me the next time without trying to be funny. OVER GRADED, ALTERED & COUNTERFEIT coins are not funny. My "rant" is over.
I'm not interested in a back and forth or a gotcha or a forum win. Also, I don't have the desire to use bold, underline or red fonts to emphasize what I am saying (that's a little sarcasm, sorry, I can't help it). Quite simply, I am saying you could have simply said, the humor doesn't add to the discussion or simply ignored it or if you wanted, you could have said, @#$%! you people and your stupid jokes. I would have been fine with any of those options. But, in my opinion, insulting anybody who didn't write a detailed write up in response helps less than a few jokes on your educational thread.
I don't speak "snowflake." Anyway, I'll give you a "D" for a correct answer without following the quiz directions.